Pixel Perfect wrote:
So you just want a 300-400 f/4?
That would be better option as for me and possibly lighter lens. But whould I need it at all if I have 500L? I remember trying Nikon lens and it is huge and heavy. I believe zoom lovers will be happy with it but not me.
When I first saw this I thought that it would fit in my arsenal perfectly. But then common sense kicked in for me. It's 200mm - 400mm f/4.0, but I have the 70-200mm f/2.8 and paired with the 300mm f/2.8 II and the 1.4x III would be 420mm f/4.0 and may ultimately have better image quality (surmising here) and be lighter and possibly cheaper too!
Interesting lens. I was hoping they would come out with a 400 mm 3.5 Super Telephoto lens like Nikon had years ago. I'm just waiting to see how this lens will perform before even considering it a possible addition.
Sounds wonderful if it is as good as it sounds.. I will be after one of them is price is say 5k after all it is still not a prime lens and should compete on price with the Nikon 200-400
I'm surprised that it took Canon so long to introduce a 200-400mm zoom; the Nikon version has been a big seller for years, despite its well-know optical deficiencies. Undoubtedly the Canon version will be significantly sharper.
I was a bit puzzled by the built-in extender, but I guess this allows Canon to design an extender specifically for this lens - no need to make compromises in order to be compatible with a broad range of lens designs.
I think it's time to find who that rich uncle is, and where he lives !!! Gotta get in really close with the rest of the well-to-do side of the family now !!!
molson wrote:
I'm surprised that it took Canon so long to introduce a 200-400mm zoom; the Nikon version has been a big seller for years, despite its well-know optical deficiencies.
I must admit I never heard of these well known optical deficiencies.
markymarc wrote:
So any guesses on how this integrated TC works?
I mean if its integrated, then its always there right? So when it is turned on, it adds a stop so everything is f5.6?
But when it is not in use, how does it get out of the way? Does the TC flip up like a garage door?
Marc
In a way, yes. The lens barrel has a side compartment, which houses the entire extender group when not in use. The group is affixed to a lever which the user flips into position when the extender is desired. This moves the extender into the optical path. There is also a locking mechanism adjacent to the lever which, when engaged, prevents accidental motion of the extender group.
The construction is not unlike a simplified phoropter (a device that an optometrist uses, which contains an array of lenses that a patient looks through when having their vision tested). The extender is simply swung aside when it is not needed. This permits the main optics of the lens to remain unaffected by extraneous glass, while allowing the convenience of switching to a purpose-built extender without dismounting the lens.
Yakim Peled wrote:
I must admit I never heard of these well known optical deficiencies.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
I've owned three copies of the Nikon 200-400 VR, and all were disappointing at medium and far distances. In fact, at subject distances beyond about 75 feet, my $1500 EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS handily outperformed any of the three copies of the Nikon lens.
The issue has been documented by several (die-hard) professional Nikon users, including Thom Hogan and Michael Weber.
I remember trying Nikon lens and it is huge and heavy. I believe zoom lovers will be happy with it but not me.